Appeal No. 2006-0027 6
Application No. 10/287,889
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art reference discloses,
expressly or under principles of inherency, each and every element of a claimed
invention. RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221
USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984). In other words, there must be no difference between
the claimed invention and the reference disclosure, as viewed by a person of ordinary
skill in the field of the invention. Scripps Clinic & Research Found. v. Genentech Inc.,
927 F.2d 1565, 1576, 18 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (Fed. Cir. 1991). For purposes of the
subject rejection, the examiner (see pages 3 and 4 in the final rejection) considers the
combination of Wong’s slider 30 and rotating arm 40 to meet (1) the limitations in
independent claims 1 and 11, and the corresponding limitation in independent claim 17,
requiring a retainer or means adapted to apply an increasing level of retention force to
an expansion card as a size of the card increases, and (2) the limitations in independent
claims 44 and 51, and the corresponding limitation in independent claim 57, requiring a
retainer or retaining means adapted to apply a varying level of retention force to an
expansion card based on the size of the card. Wong, however, does not contain any
disclosure which would lead a person of ordinary skill in the art to view the slider 30 and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007